User reviews

Just finished reading the book "Divergent" before the movie opened today. It was a quick easy read. There was obvious inspiration from various other futuristic young adult books I have read, like "The Giver", "Ender's Game" and the "Hunger Games" books. Like the others, the treatment of the story was cold, But its descriptions of the initiation rites were very much more violent.

The setting is the walled city of Chicago after a great war. Their society is divided into five distinct Factions based on personality traits: Dauntless (brave), Amity (friendly), Candor (honest), Erudite (intelligent) and Abnegation (selfless).

At the age of 16, a child takes an examination to help him choose which one will be his faction for the rest of his life. He may follow the suggestion of the exam results, or he may decide on his own. Those who fail to be accepted into a faction becomes factionless, as they become hopelessly poor and destitute for life.

Our heroine Beatrice Prior has been born to the Abnegation faction with their grey clothes and disdain for any form of vanity. However, her examination results are revealed to be inconclusive, so she has to make her own decision. Meanwhile, an uprising is brewing in Erudite against the government run by Abnegation.

I had some problem with the book and the way they try to make the Factions distinct from each other, when it is easy to see that overlapping does happen. These traits simply cannot be mutually exclusive from each other. It is also disturbing the way the author describes the Dauntless. Does being brave mean jumping off running trains, having piercings and tattoos, beating each other up mercilessly, or even killing yourself? This may give immature readers the wrong ideas about courage.

• o - o - o -

The film was a perfectly conceived interpretation of the book. In the first few scenes where they show the color-coded clothes distinguishing each faction was quite clear. How director Neil Burger showed us most of the memorable scenes in the book, like the choosing ceremony, the jumping on and off the trains, the fear landscapes of Tris and Four, and the invasion of Abnegation were all very well done.

There were some parts which were reinterpreted in the film. Most did not really affect the story-telling, like changing how Tris meets her Mom during Visiting Day, or glossing over a particularly violent episode where Peter stabs a fellow initiate in the eye. There was one big change towards the end about how a climactic surprise rescue transpired. I thought the version in the book was so much more better set-up and executed than the less-dramatic altered version we saw on screen.

As I suspected, the tall and beautiful Shailene Woodley is definitely not the small and mousy Tris we imagine while reading the book. However, I thought Shailene gave an excellent portrayal of Tris' character, how she developed from a shy dependent girl to a confident fearless warrior. For people who have not read the books, they will not be aware of any discrepancy at all.

Theo James had very good romantic chemistry with Shailene, so his Four never really felt like a threat to Tris, unlike the initial parts in the book. The director gave James a lot of lingering close-ups for the benefit of the teenage fan girls.

Ansel Elgort, who played Tommy Ross in "Carrie" recently, now plays Tris' brother Caleb. His Caleb is less dynamic than I imagined him in the book. Coincidentally, Elgort has an upcoming movie with Shailene Woodley later this year called "The Fault in Our Stars" where they play boyfriend-girlfriend.

More up and coming actors play other more minor characters. Zoe Kravitz, who was in "After Earth" last year, is not exactly how I envisioned Tris' best friend, but she won me over as the film went along. Miles Teller, who was recently in "That Awkward Moment", plays bad boy Peter, whose role in the film is much diminished compared to the book. Jai Courtney, who played Bruce Willis' son in "A Good Day to Die Hard" last year, brutally plays Tris' tormentor in the training camp.

Among the senior stars, Ashley Judd makes a nice comeback of sorts playing Tris' mother, who had major secrets of her own. Maggie Q played Tris' examiner and tattoo artist Tori with the requisite compassion. Kate Winslet plays the cool and calculating Erudite uprising leader Jeanine with icy perfection.

Overall, I thought this film was a practically perfect interpretation of a book that was less than perfect in itself. So, whatever things the film might show us which we might not like, like the slow pace of action progression, and the questionable motives of the characters, are actually because the book told it that way. Fans of the "Divergent" books will find this film version faithful. While it cannot compare to the high standard set by the Hunger Games film series in terms of cinematic quality and character casting, "Divergent" definitely has its own entertaining appeal going for it. 7/10.

I have to say that the producers would have to be stupid not to use Burger again as the director. He did such a great job with this one. I thought I was going to see a film that was mostly aimed at teens. However the story alone makes this far superior to most teen oriented films. In fact this didn't feel much like a teen film at all. The fantasy story is a great metaphor for our current society, it's simply a very relevant film. The directing here was spot on. The story as fun as it is, does have a few holes, sure, but they are easy to look over because they are such small holes. The film simply works as a commentary piece on political philosophy, and as an entertaining action film laced with some romantic tension. In my view this film was far, far superior to the very teen oriented and very one dimensional Hunger Games, and it's certainly more unique as well. Woodley is impressive here, clearly showing the ability to play a very layered and complex character.

8/10

"Divergent" is the first Sci-Fi movie of this trilogy and in this movie we watch a world that is divided into factions and each person has to be a part of one. Unfortunately Tris cannot be a part to any of these factions because she is a divergent. Divergents are considered as the most important and dangerous people and have to be eliminated but why?

I liked this movie because it has a different kind of plot from other Sci-Fi movies and that's something that made this movie interesting at first. The direction which made by Neil Burger was very good with many good action scenes. Also the interpretation of Shailene Woodley who played as Tris was very good. An equally good interpretation made by Theo James who played as Four.

Finally I have to admit that I did not expect much from "Divergent" but it was a very nice surprise. This movie made a very good start for this trilogy and I hope to continue like this and even better.

When beloved books make their way to the silver screen, the resulting movies are usually met with much frustration and rending of clothes from amongst the literary faithful. A character is changed beyond recognition; a crucial plot-point excised; an important theme lost in the murk and swell of a film. Oddly, Divergent isn't actually a bad adaptation. In fact, Neil Burger's film is as good a version of Veronica Roth's wildly patchy source novel as you're likely to get. Whether that makes for a good movie - especially for people who've never read the book - is another matter entirely.

Divergent begins in a post-apocalyptic Chicago divided into five factions, each valuing one virtue - Dauntless (courage), Erudite (wisdom), Candour (honesty), Amity (kindness), and Abnegation (self-sacrifice) - above all others. It's an odd system, perhaps, but one that is apparently necessary to keep chaos at bay. Tris Prior (Shailene Woodley) has been raised in Abnegation but, try as she might, she cannot completely subsume her self or her desires. Indeed, the aptitude test that everyone must take at the age of sixteen suggests that Tris doesn't belong in just one category: she is Divergent, equally at home in three factions.

Come the day of the Choosing Ceremony, she decides to forsake her family to become Dauntless: a decision that plunges her into a nightmare initiation process in which the weakest are summarily kicked out of the faction. As Tris navigates the politics and perils of her chosen world, trying all the while to hide the fact that she's Divergent, she encounters her fair share of allies - Christina (Zoe Kravitz), Will (Ben Lloyd-Hughes) and possibly her charmingly broody instructor Four (Theo James) - and enemies, including the brutal Eric (Jai Courtney) and vicious Peter (Miles Teller).

Anyone unfamiliar with Roth's book might find themselves trying to puzzle through this seemingly shapeless mess of a plot. It ebbs and flows in odd directions, dancing around Tris' desire to be true to herself, before it gets a little lost in the dystopian clutches of Jeanine Matthews (a gleefully icy, evil Kate Winslet), an Erudite leader hellbent on bringing down the entire Abnegation faction. Along the way, Tris literally battles her fears under the influence of a simulation serum, toughens up physically, strikes up a sexy chemistry with Four and frets over her brother Caleb (Ansel Elgort). Within the confines of this universe, it makes an odd kind of narrative sense, but the logic of it all never really bleeds through.

Here's the thing, though: this strange, frequently illogical plotting is very much a defining characteristic of Roth's novel - and, in fact, becomes more of a problem as the trilogy progresses. (Anyone who's read Allegiant, the controversial final novel in the series, will know just how difficult it will be to adapt.) The emotional and logical flaws present in Divergent the film, then, are - for the most part - already inherent in the book. Why does Jeanine, supposedly one of the smartest people in the community, plot and plan the way she does? How does the entire society function in this utterly dysfunctional way? Technically, Burger can't really be faulted for failing to develop a coherence and logic that was never there in the first place.

In fact, Burger actually substantially improves upon the novel in several ways - he keeps the film mostly free of Tris' inner voice, which becomes increasingly moony and silly as her crush on Four grows by the day. Burger plays up a zip-line sequence that highlights the joyful recklessness of the Dauntless, as Tris soars freely through the midnight air. He also handles the problem of Tris' fear landscape very well: instead of simply willing herself out of the influence of the serum (as the Divergent can do), she must figure out how to face each of her fears in a non-Divergent way. These scenes are shot with quick, simple visual flair, dispensing with some of the novel's trickier convolutions.

Of course, Divergent isn't a perfect adaptation either. To Roth's credit, there are some truly dark, painful moments in the novel which transcend its loopy narrative. It's no surprise, and yet it's a little disappointing, that these bits simply vanish from the film, no doubt in the interests of securing a PG-13 rating. As a result, Peter is a far less repulsive antagonist than he is on paper. For instance, he doesn't brutally (and casually) maul a fellow initiate who's doing better than him in the rankings - an incident that's crucial in the development of his character in the subsequent novels.

The young cast works hard and quite well together. Woodley makes for an intriguing screen presence, effectively playing both the steel and softness of Tris' choices. James, heretofore best known for dying in Lady Mary's bed in Downton Abbey, acquits himself reasonably well - he's not as leaden as some of the trailers have suggested, and he forges a believable chemistry with Woodley. Of the supporting players, Teller is the standout, so good in his easy malevolence that he actually makes the thought of Allegiant as a movie quite appealing.

In the final analysis, Divergent is likely to divide audiences. Fans of Roth's books should be, on the whole, pleased. This is a frequently very good, intelligent adaptation of a rather problematic novel. Everyone else, however, might be less enamoured of the final product: a film that, just like the book on which it is based, boasts a compelling story and some great ideas, but is also messily executed, overly complicated and a tad nonsensical.

Settling in to this film, I expected to see Hunger Games again. Set in a near-future Chicago, what we see is another take on the dystopian society. The central plot here is that growing up in this walled in world, everyone must fit into one of five classes. But of course, the question here is what if you don't fit into the nicely packaged definition of a single class, then you must be Divergent, or in this movie, a danger to the perfect society. When our main character, Tris (played very well by Shailene Woodley)finds out she is Divergent she must hide this secret and discover the reasons why it is such a secret and why society fears Divergents. I'll leave all of that for you to watch unfold in the various physical and psychological training exercises that are portrayed on screen. In a nutshell, the world painted is similar to that of Equilibrium but with much less action. This is not a bad thing, since this allows the cinematographer to reveal a very wonderfully crafted view of this world. The pacing of this movie moves along nicely as we plod through Tris trying to fit in as a part of the Dauntless clan. Friendships are made, lost, and so on as expected. Even more so is the romantic involvement with the mysterious Four (or 4) played by Theo James (which I believe over acted his part entirely too much). So the mystery of why the government wants to kill all Divergents must be unraveled and this leads to the majority of the story. I was happy with just sitting back and enjoying the view during many of the scenes that were almost breathtaking. Not reading the book, I hope that the movie did well to portray the story but I also know it is a trilogy so they couldn't go from start to finish all at once. Stand alone I believe the movie was quite well made and under-appreciated, swept under the rug by the highly successful Hunger Games series. You will be hard pressed not to see the similarities between them. I am looking forward to seeing what else this world has in store for us and would recommend that moviegoers join me to find out. Will you see silly acted parts, and scenes that are just there to draw you in with nice landscapes and perfectly choreographed music, YES. But why would anyone complain about something like that? I know I wouldn't. Enjoy this film, you won't regret the time you spent on it.

My review is not based on reading the book but solely on the movie alone. I found the movie very similar to The Hunger Games in the sense that it divides people into groups and focuses on the teenagers. But this movie was 100x better! It had me on the edge of my seat for most of the movie. This movie is inspiring and motivational. It is the type of movie that shows that accepting people for the flaws and their strengths is important and that everyone is different in their own way and that it's okay to be who you are. I think more kids need to see these types of movies and I would recommend it to anyone. P.S. Do not watch this movie before or after The Fault In Our Stars cause it may make things a bit weird haha.

Divergent is gripping and intelligently brought to life on the big screen from the director who brought us "Limitless" and "The Illusionist." Are we seeing something of similar essence with the "Hunger Games" series? Yes. However, my personal take was that the characters were more engaging and the plot was as well in this film. Shailene is excellent at the helm, and really brings forth a convincing portrayal of a heroine battling in a world where chaos and tragedy envelope the characters. Her graceful emergence from shy personality to dominance is done artfully and really speaks to her ability as an actress. Theo James is also exceptional in the co-pilot role and almost effortlessly seems to pull off the bad boy with standards persona in a manner I haven't seen since Will Smith in his prime. The plot is high octane and especially more gritty than I first imagined. The emotion raw in intensity and empathic build. As a guy who was just going to this film to act as arm candy and a shoulder to lean on for my highly enthused girlfriend, I can write this piece while honestly saying that my eyes were glued to the screen the entirety of the film and was pleased to see this film do such an excellent job at developing both the plot and characters involved in it. Highly Recommend.

DIVERGENT delivers where so many of the recent young adult novel film adaptations have failed. I saw this film not having read the book and on its own it stands very well.

First off the bad:

1) action sequences feel slow and not natural. You can tell that the actors were not particularly familiar with hand to hand combat, not to say their characters weren't supposed to be but even when they're supposed to know how to fight it feels lackluster. 2) obvious age difference between the two main characters. 3) high school Clich feel for the first half of the film.

Now with that said ^ here is what Worked:

1) length. Often we see film adaptations of novels try and cram everything into 90 or 100 mins but Divergent takes its time. Normally this would be a drawback but the film makes good use of the extra time (the film is 145 mins) to really progress. 2) the performances of the main characters are solid. Nothing amazing but the dynamic between the two main characters works well. - the visual style of the film is very good. The dystopian city of Chicago is very well realized. 3) brings to light moral and societal problems. Suprizingly deep for a young adult film.

OVERALL divergent is a good film. It fails in few places but succeeds in most that count. With the failure of young adult movies such as Percy Jackson, Divergent healthily separates itself from them. I would recommend seeing it. There WILL be a sequel.

I'm glad I got around to watching this, I'm not sure who's writing the negative reviews or what they were expecting but I can honestly say that this is the best tween film I've seen in a long time.

It IS a tween film, it's blatantly aimed at young girls and as a "twenty-something" youngish female, I'm not embarrassed to say that I really enjoyed this film. It's pure fantasy fodder of course but here's what I liked about it:

• the relationship between the two leads develops naturally i.e. they don't see each other and go 'you're my soulmate', in fact they don't really get on at first so this is believable and refreshing

• the lead actress (Shailene Woodley) playing Tris is extremely natural and one of a very few actors I've ever seen who has convinced me that they are grieving (usually grief in films is just 'oh, they're dead, I'm so upset' ... swiftly moves on with their day..) - Actually both of the leads (Theo James as well) play their roles really well

• I loved the point of view shots like when Tris looks at Four during the training and you see it from his perspective and then the camera cuts to his face to get his reaction to the look she gives him (there are other similar scenes) and it just adds to the effect of feeling like these are real people and I empathised with them more as a result

• Yeah the background story for the city is quite thin but who cares, stranger things have happened in the real world and what I like is that we're given a sense of 'this is what they've been told but is that what's really happened?'. I'm not sure if that's in the book or if the film makers wanted to add some realism for us grown-ups but when they question what's out there, I got the feeling this might be similar to The Island (2005) - that's not a spoiler it's just my opinion and probably totally off base

I have now watched this film about 4 or 5 times because I really liked so much of it: the fighting was believable for me because I think we've all gotten used to flashy choreography and sound effects but that's not what real fights look like or how they sound so for me, these fight scenes are really good. I liked the weapons because they kept it simple and for training, they're a good idea.

Probably the thing I liked the most is the fact that "it's not all about Tris". I mean, it IS all about Tris but it's not 'totally in your face, the world revolves around Tris and no-one else matters' all about Tris... What I mean is that there are some "films" out there which spend their entire running time having the supporting actors running around warning the lead actress not to have sex with her boyfriend lest he destroy her vagina but in this film, the lead actress often shares centre stage with her new best friend, there are a lot of scenes where she is in the background looking out as opposed to a lot of shots of her standing alone / in the centre and we see her friend fighting too; the focus is just not 'always' on her. Having said that, I do think that there could have been even 'more' focus on the people around her. First of all, had we gotten to know her friends better, we might have empathised with them more (trying not to include spoilers!) and also, this will sound harsh but it needs saying, I'm sick of seeing 'ethnic' people in minor or reduced roles: what a waste of Mekhi Phifer! I wish that Zoë Kravitz had been given more to do, yes she had a decent amount of screen time but I would have liked to maybe see her 'fearscape' and... that's about it for ethnic characters I think... yep.

I liked that Jai Courtney's character didn't go overboard as the villain but again, his character was a little one dimensional and I would have liked to have seen some more interaction and dialogue between him and Four just to flesh out their background story.

Kate Winslet honestly did the best she could with her part and it's a massive credit to her that she managed to make me severely dislike her and believe that she was evil with just a few odd lines here and there. Her role is to literally just pop into the film every now and then to be a bit menacing and give off a female-Hitler vibe (bright blonde hair). But she pulls it off in my opinion. There's no point in elaborating on why someone is pure evil, we know this exists, it's happened in the real world and it's still happening so her role didn't distract from the believability of the story.

Overall, I liked the subtlety of the story. There is no sex, no profanity, no overt 'I love yous' yet it didn't come across as 'after-school-specially' at all. Also, I never groaned out loud once or cringed or had to hide my face behind a pillow while someone professed their undying love for someone they just met a week ago. The dialogue was realistic with occasional over-rehearsed acting from some of the supporting cast but I really loved this film. Go into it knowing it's a tween film and that there won't be a lot of intelligent scientific explanations for things and you'll probably enjoy it as much as I did.

9/10

As a stand alone movie, Divergent was great. The cinematography was decent, but the storyline alone was marvelous. The action keeps you on the edge of your seat. The romance was well... romantic. It may have been a little too sappy and forced to me, but still cute. All in all, the movie was a perfect blend of comedy, mystery, action, drama, and romance. Thus, a new fan base was created.The only problems with this movie were the acting was a bit shaky at some points and it diverged from the books a lot too (see what I did there). The characters were well developed in the movie as well as the book, but some details about the characters were left out from the movie that were in the book. The settings and storyline did the same thing as well.

I went to see this movie misled by the high rating on IMDb. Unfortunately it looks like Hollywood makes movies for people with short memory. I admit I haven't read the source book, but I guess I wouldn't, judging by what came out of it. I hereby venture myself in saying that the book is also a bad SciFi novel. It has way to obvious imports from well known themes that have been exploited to the brim by today (like the "perfect" society that sacrifices diversity for peace, the "different" guy that stands-up to the system, the genuine technology that controls individuals (poorly described, by the way), the fear confrontation ad the list could go on and on. It is not essentially bad to bring these themes in a movie, but I see nothing new, original here. So... if you have seen Equilibrum and the Hunger Games then you know it all. Movies today are just mobile phones... keep reproducing "features" from the competition, while it is supposed to be an art. Another thing can't stand in movies in general is the poor IT incursions. I am talking about the scene in which Jeanine is asked to turn off the "control system" which consists of a huge touch screen in which she just hits some "cancel" button. That was really pathetic... Anyone could have done that right? Another thing that I can't stand, is the cheap psychology things in these movies. They are all based on some sort of psychoanalysis which is long time deprecated in therapy. But it is somehow considered to be "cool" and "trendy" by producers to insert these kind of flavour into the movies to make it more profound. Or are they just as stupid and ignorants as the target viewers? Anyhow... to me, this is bad taste in art. If you want to really go for it, you must do way better that that and if you can't, then at least make it more interesting. It is also true that movies like "Inception" don't occur every month, but once they do... they set a trend and everybody will just take a byte of it. Don't get me wrong, it is a "watchable" movie, perhaps a little too long for its story, which, by the way, is very predictable and full of clichés. I read some users claiming it resembles "The Hunger Games" and so it is, especially with the modest ending that awkwardly announces a sequel. I could predict how the story developed and ended after the first 15 minutes and that's what makes this movie mediocre. Script is mediocre, but at least it does not abounds in stereotypes so it's bearable. What can be said about acting... there is no acting in this kind of movies, you only need to be young and good looking, be able to learn your part and you're done. It's not that the actors are bad, but the movie itself is not based on any acting mastery and just because of that, the girl gets a plus for making something out of it. I am curious if the ratings will stay as high as now in time.

I watched the movie without having read any of the series, and yet, it is apparent that the movie did the books justice. I absolutely like how there is less romance and more substance this movie has compared to other similarly themed movies. The casting crew did a great job by choosing the lead actor and actress. The depth of the characters development is proper. Thus, this movie is also entertaining for adults. I sense good chemistry among the casts. The lead actress successfully portrays a confused yet brave teenager and captures innocence, while the lead actor renders a mature vibe that help save the movie from being categorized as another superficial teenage love story.

When first hearing of this film and seeing the first trailer, I didn't know what to think about it. It didn't excitement me much and all the way up to it's release, I didn't feel it had that same kind of vibe that 'The Hunger Games' had. A vibe that it was a must see film. Then I heard a sample track from the score, composed by Junkie XL. It was great, and it made me want to see the movie a little bit. Well that and I wanted to see if it was actually a great film, like The Hunger Games was. Plus I do like the main star, Shailene Woodley. Well, I just saw it today and here is what I think. The music is great, it has one of those themes that I can't get out of my head and a score I've been listening to since I left the theater. The film itself was a very interesting film, very different from what I understood from the trailer, but I'm not familiar with the story so that is probably the main reason. I really liked the futuristic, post-apocalyptic, dystopian feel that it had going on through it, but it also was kind of scary to think that human life could become that one day. The plot was easy enough to follow, but sometimes confusing. Though, if I had read the book, I'm sure I would understand it 100%. The elements I had trouble remembering were the names of all the factions that people were divided in, or chose to be in, and what those factions' meanings were. When they would show the symbols for each faction, it made sense to me, but the names itself I couldn't quite grasp. I'm sure a second viewing will clear that up, defiantly if that second viewing is on blu-ray and with the captions on. Anyway, other than that, It kept me quite intrigued in a pleasantly unexpected way and I really look forward to next year for the sequel, Insurgent, and the year after that for the concluding film, Allegiant.

Not quite the quality of The Hunger Games, but still have its own persona and unique setting. The story takes time to find its feet, and while the action sequences was great, the vast number of characters kind of put things in the mix for this decent young adult novel adaptation.

The world felt a bit weird and extreme at first, and it takes time before we can finally believe and be immersed in the world. Meanwhile, story-wise was great in the bigger picture, but the first half of the film was all about Dauntless and so it flows in a very narrow scope. Afterwards, the bigger picture is revealed, when we finally realize the significance of "Divergent" characters, and the scale of the conflict. That's when the story kind of takes a hard turn and get going for a full blast finale.

The vast number of characters makes it hard to follow most of the supporting characters, making things a little confusing, all the while making us less caring for them. Yet, this also means that we can kind of like the main protagonists. With all the different kind of characters, those we want to hate, those we don't care for, leaving us with the main protagonists to like and root for. This is perhaps the reason why we can care for them emotionally, despite the less emotional nature of the unfolding plot. The first half of the film has no drama for us to feel, while in the second, there was too much of drama where we end up getting lost emotionally (in the end, all I care about is the two main protagonists).

The visuals were great, and so were the action sequences, supported by a decent soundtrack with some very likable themes as well. The villain of the film was interesting on its own & fresh for a new franchise like this, and the acting by Kate Winslet was also brilliant, but to be frank, they will need a more threatening & challenging villain if they are to up the stakes for the sequels (truthfully, it is well decided in the novels already, but given that I don't read them, I cross my fingers that the next villain will prove more challenging). The twist towards the end is interesting, and quite a nice touch as well. Meanwhile, the ending felt much too abrupt and unfinished, and it just begs of a sequel to come fast.

VERDICT:

Good: Great visuals & action, Decent soundtrack, Unique setting, Vast array of characters (mixed)

Bad: Takes time to find its feet, Abrupt ending

SCORE: 7.0

(blockbusted9.blogspot.com)